A couple of OFF "cheats" for you.

[DukeIronHand 8]

Just a couple of little OFF "cheats" for the gang here. This may be old news but I have never seen them posted here so as I drink my morning coffee I thought I would throw them out here if anyone wants to use them.

 

1) In my Alb/DIII campaign I was once on a solo flight and shot down a Be/2c that crashed right on a neighboring Jasta's aerodrome. And in flames. No problem with confirmation I figure as I fly merrily home.

After a day or two of campaign time I still have not received confirmation so I looked into the OFF folders and find the "Pilot#Claims.txt" in the Pilots folder.

If you look in there you can see the claims and pending claims. The last two characters (numbers) in your pending claim line are two numbers that appear to vary from 10 to 100. This is, it seems, the percentage chance your claim is going to be recognized. Well, for my Be/2c claim I figure my chance of confirmation could not be better so I changed it to 100 (from the 70 it was at) and viola, claim confirmed.

So if you have a shoot down that you feel has to/should be recognized you can make this little modification for your pilot.

 

2) Once I was landing an Alb/DIII at my aerodrome with (of course!) engine damage. This was going quite well so I may have gotten a bit cocky and tried a last minute steer to straighten out a bit and, flying very low and slow just prior to touchdown, my left wing appeared to brush the ground of the landing field. Much to my surprise, as I fly "DiD", OFF said I was dead. In my mind there was no way I should have been killed in this incident and, having invested much time in this pilot, I looked into the "Pilot#Dossier.txt" in the Pilots folder again. I forget exactly what lines I changed but it is a text file and it was clear which lines of text were making me dead so I changed them (comparing the lines with a living pilot) and, viola again, I was back alive and in service.

 

Just a couple of tools for your Campaign toolbox.

 

 

Edit: Yikes! Horrible morning grammar.

Edited October 2, 2011 by DukeIronHand

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

Just a couple of little OFF "cheats" for the gang here. This may be old news but I have never seen the posted here so as I drink my morning coffee I thought I would throw them out here if anyone wants to use them.

 

1) In my Alb/DIII campaign I was once on a solo flight and shot down a Be/2c that crashed right on a neighboring Jasta's aerodrome. And in flames. No problem with confirmation I figure as I fly merrily home.

After a day or two of campaign time I still have not received confirmation so I look into the OFF folders and find the "Pilot#Claims.txt" in the Pilots folder.

If you look in their you can see the claims and pending claims. The last two characters (numbers)in your pending claim line are two numbers that appear to vary from 10 to 100. This is, it seems, the percentage chance your claim is going to be recognized. Well, for my Be/2c claim I figure my chance of confirmation could not be better so I changed it to 100 (from the 70 it was at) and viola, claim confirmed.

So if you have a shoot down that you feel has to/should be recognized you can make this little modification for your pilot.

 

2) Once I was landing an Alb/DIII at my aerodrome with (of course!) engine damage. This was going quite well so I may have gotten a bit cocky and tried a last minute steer to straighten out a bit and, flying very low and slow just prior to touchdown, my left wing appeared to brush the ground of the landing field. Much to my surprise, as I fly "DiD", OFF said I was dead. In my mind there was no way I should have been killed in this incident and, having invested much time in this pilot, I looked into the "Pilot#Dossier.txt" in the pilots folder again. I forget exactly what lines I changed but it is a text file and it was clear which lines of text were making me dead so I changed them (comparing the lines with a living pilot) and, viola again, I was back alive and in service.

 

Just a couple of tools for your Campaign toolbox.

 

Thanks for that Duke...I think I would use that with care..to avoid ruining the reality feel of OFF...but I must admit..when you lose a good pilot...........

[Hasse Wind 46]

I hope something can be done to the small landing accidents that so often prove fatal in P3. It's annoying when I lose a pilot after a small bounce of the aircraft that has almost stopped moving. I can understand the occasional bad luck (maybe the pilot hit his head or something) but it shouldn't happen so often. There's something wrong with the landing code in CFS3. I prefer to use the die roll setting, so that my pilots have at least some chance of surviving crash landings.

[+Winder 32]

I hope something can be done to the small landing accidents that so often prove fatal in P3. It's annoying when I lose a pilot after a small bounce of the aircraft that has almost stopped moving. I can understand the occasional bad luck (maybe the pilot hit his head or something) but it shouldn't happen so often. There's something wrong with the landing code in CFS3. I prefer to use the die roll setting, so that my pilots have at least some chance of surviving crash landings.

 

Strange never heard of that one or experienced it unless your craft has taken damage during the mission?

 

Specific craft or all or some?

 

WM

[Bullethead 12]

Be careful playing with your pilot's text files. Doing it too much tends to cause problems down the road and eventually make that pilot unplayable.

[Hasse Wind 46]

Strange never heard of that one or experienced it unless your craft has taken damage during the mission?

 

Specific craft or all or some?

 

WM

 

I think it can happen in any aircraft. If you stay on the landing wheels, it doesn't happen, but if the landing is even a bit too rough and for example the nose hits the ground, it's pretty easy to get killed. I think it shouldn't be so dangerous at slow speeds, though I'm willing to accept the occasional stroke of bad luck that kills or maims the pilot. It's definitely not something that ruins the sim experience, just an occasional nuisance.

 

Edit: I've seen this in unmodified OFF too, so it's not the mods.

Edited October 2, 2011 by Hasse Wind

[Olham 164]

"Die roll on death" is absolutely okay and no cheating, Hasse Wind, as it decides about exactly that:

wether an accident is fatal or if you will just stand up with minor bruises.

 

By the way: I never have any landing accidents in Albatros fighters.

Only exception: recently I made a landing approach in a strong sidewind - almost "side-storm".

In that landing I had almost crashed into the parking planes.

Edited October 2, 2011 by Olham

[Bullethead 12]

I think it can happen in any aircraft. If you stay on the landing wheels, it doesn't happen, but if the landing is even a bit too rough and for example the nose hits the ground, it's pretty easy to get killed. I think it shouldn't be so dangerous at slow speeds, though I'm willing to accept the occasional stroke of bad luck that kills or maims the pilot. It's definitely not something that ruins the sim experience, just an occasional nuisance.

 

Edit: I've seen this in unmodified OFF too, so it's not the mods.

 

I think the reason for this is a function of what "contact points" remain on the plane as a result of damage either before or during the landing. Contact points are attached to various extremeties of the 3D plane model and are what keep it cause it to interact with the surface of the ground. Those on the bottoms of the wheels and tailskid are what make the plane sit correctly on the ground and do proper landings and takeoffs. There are others on the wingtips (usually lower wing only), the top of the rudder, the nose, and (in most cases) on top of the pilot's head. These trigger damage because these parts of the plane shouldn't normally touch the ground. A part of the plane that does NOT have a contact point will go straight through the ground without any effect.

 

Death in a bad landing (as opposed to a vertical diving crash) is apparently caused by the pilot's contact point hitting the ground. There might be some parameters attached to this, such as a range of speeds that causes injury and anything above that death, and it might also take into account whether you have a parachute open or not. Or maybe there's nothing at all, and if this contact point touches, it's game over. I just don't know. However, the key to survival is keeping the pilot's head off the ground.

 

This, in turn, depends entirely on what happens to the other contact points. If they stop the plane's penetration of the ground in that direction, then they will keep the pilot from contacting the ground. Contact points attached to flimsy structures like the tail and wingtips apparently disappear when that part of the plane is shot or broken off. Thus, the fate of the surrounding structure directly impacts pilot survival.

 

For this reason, flipping over your nose is less dangerous than dragging a wingtip. If the center section of the upper wing stays intact, it'll keep your head off the ground and you'll usually live, unless the speed was too high by itself. But in a rollover, once the wing contact point(s) is/are gone, there's nothing (at least as far as internal game mechanics are concerned) between you and the ground.

 

The attached pics show all this in operation. On this flight, while barnstorming my home drome on return from a successful sortie, I left my lower left wing in a treetop. As long as my speed was high enough, I had sufficient aileron authority to keep her level so I picked out a nice field ahead and made a fast landing. The 1st pic shows that I came down in perfect 2-pointer on smooth ground. However, as my speed decreased while rolling on the ground, my aileron authority decreased as well, so that the plane started rolling over to the left under its unequal lift.

 

The 2nd pic shows what happened next. With the lower left wing's contact point missing, and the upper left wing not having one to begin with, the upper wing just sliced through the ground without interacting with it at all. It took no damage and did nothing to stop the airplane rolling over. The side of the fuselage and the left horizontal tail tip (also without contact points) followed it through the ground. Eventually, the plane had rolled a bit more than 90^ when my head hit the ground and killed me.

 

The nose contact point never made contact due to the angle of the roll causing my protruding head to reach the ground first. I suppose I might have given myself a better chance if I'd kicked hard LEFT rudder into the roll, to raise me as far as possible off the ground and try to make the nose contact point hit next. That might have bounced me back onto my wheels or it might have killed me from crash impact. But just rolling over like this is usually fatal.

 

This is why dragging a wingtip on landing can kill you. If you break the lower wingtip off, AND you're still moving fast enough for the remaining wings to generate significant aerodynamic forces, then you will continue rolling in that direction until your head hits the ground.

 

From my tinkering with making a new plane model, I learned that the CFS3 engine has a limited number of contact points per plane. And because it was designed for WW2 monoplanes, it's hard if not impossible to add contact points to the upper wing or other parts of the plane and still have enough to cover the ones you really need. Thus, I don't think there's a way to solve this problem other than to make better landings

 

 

 

 

[carrick58 23]

Good Tips and Pics Thanks

[Hasse Wind 46]

Well, that certainly answers everything I was wondering about the problem. Yeah, better landings are in order. But it's easier said than done, when somebody shoots my plane to pieces and then I try to bring her down gently!

 

Still, there's P4 coming, so who knows what the devs can do to this. They've cracked more than a few problematic CFS3 nuts already...

Edited October 2, 2011 by Hasse Wind

[Bullethead 12]

Well, that certainly answers everything I was wondering about the problem. Yeah, better landings are in order. But it's easier said than done, when somebody shoots my plane to pieces and then I try to bring her down gently!

 

Well, the answer to that is, don't get shot up .

 

It's way better to lose just a tip than the whole wing. With the tip missing, although it usually takes the contact point with it, the unequal lift isn't as bad as if the whole wing is gone, so you're less likely to roll over. With sufficient rudder, you can keep the bird more or less level but your landing rollout will describe a 90^ arc toward the damaged wing, so touch down with a lot of room on that side.

 

Best of luck, and don't drink and fly

[DukeIronHand 8]

Well, the answer to that is, don't get shot up .

 

I've been wondering why I have been having a hard time surviving long!

 

The essence of simplicity!

[DukeIronHand 8]

As an additional thought, if the Devs are still looking, it would be nice if OFF could model "true crash landings" where automatic death is not a high probability for a less than perfect landing both on the aerodrome and any where else on the map.

 

The above is not the first time the "death on bad landing" has occurred for seemingly minor set-downs.

 

I will pay attention to Bullethead's prior damage idea but he is probably right - can't think of too many reasons to crash land if you ain't damaged!

[Herr Prop-Wasche 7]

I think the reason for this is a function of what "contact points" remain on the plane as a result of damage either before or during the landing. Contact points are attached to various extremeties of the 3D plane model and are what keep it cause it to interact with the surface of the ground. Those on the bottoms of the wheels and tailskid are what make the plane sit correctly on the ground and do proper landings and takeoffs. There are others on the wingtips (usually lower wing only), the top of the rudder, the nose, and (in most cases) on top of the pilot's head. These trigger damage because these parts of the plane shouldn't normally touch the ground. A part of the plane that does NOT have a contact point will go straight through the ground without any effect.

 

Death in a bad landing (as opposed to a vertical diving crash) is apparently caused by the pilot's contact point hitting the ground. There might be some parameters attached to this, such as a range of speeds that causes injury and anything above that death, and it might also take into account whether you have a parachute open or not. Or maybe there's nothing at all, and if this contact point touches, it's game over. I just don't know. However, the key to survival is keeping the pilot's head off the ground...

 

...The attached pics show all this in operation...the 2nd pic shows what happened next. With the lower left wing's contact point missing, and the upper left wing not having one to begin with, the upper wing just sliced through the ground without interacting with it at all. It took no damage and did nothing to stop the airplane rolling over. The side of the fuselage and the left horizontal tail tip (also without contact points) followed it through the ground. Eventually, the plane had rolled a bit more than 90^ when my head hit the ground and killed me.

 

From my tinkering with making a new plane model, I learned that the CFS3 engine has a limited number of contact points per plane. And because it was designed for WW2 monoplanes, it's hard if not impossible to add contact points to the upper wing or other parts of the plane and still have enough to cover the ones you really need. Thus, I don't think there's a way to solve this problem other than to make better landings

 

I took a look at several aircraft using Airwrench and noticed that all of the planes do have contact points for the outer tip of the upper wings. Perhaps, as BH said, since CFS3 was designed for WW2 monoplanes, it won't recognize contact points on the top wing of a bi or tri plane. OTOH, I also noticed that the plane in BH's pictures is a German Albatros. Upon further investigation with Airwrench, I noticed that the upper wing contact points for the Alb D III (all models) and the Alb DVa are messed up. The problem appears to be that the contact points for the upper wing is shorter than the contact points for the lower wing on these models (14.00 ft. vs. 14.350 ft. respectively). On the DII, DV, DV later, and DVa 200, the contact point for the upper wing is 14.865 ft. I wonder if the crashes from wing roll-overs is mostly confined to the above Alb DIII's and DVa? Perhaps increasing the distance of the upper wing contact points on those aircraft might help solve the problem?

 

On a similar note, I noticed that the Camel appears to have contact points for three wings. I also noticed that most planes appear to have room for at least one more contact point. Perhaps putting one on top of the fuselage in front of the pilot or at the center of the top wing might decrease deaths from head injuries.

 

Capiche?

[DukeIronHand 8]

If the above is true then I hope the Devs are paying attention.

 

I will presume this is not an easy fix?

[Bullethead 12]

I took a look at several aircraft using Airwrench and noticed that all of the planes do have contact points for the outer tip of the upper wings. Perhaps, as BH said, since CFS3 was designed for WW2 monoplanes, it won't recognize contact points on the top wing of a bi or tri plane.

 

The 3D model viewer thingy hasn't worked for me in a long time, since like HitR came out, so I can't make much sense out of the coordinates shown in AirWrench. But I have this memory that the 3D viewer used to show contact points, and I don't recall seeing any on the top wings. In any case, the top wings act like they don't have contact points, for whatever reason, as shown by the pics above.

 

OTOH, I also noticed that the plane in BH's pictures is a German Albatros. Upon further investigation with Airwrench, I noticed that the upper wing contact points for the Alb D III (all models) and the Alb DVa are messed up. The problem appears to be that the contact points for the upper wing is shorter than the contact points for the lower wing on these models (14.00 ft. vs. 14.350 ft. respectively). On the DII, DV, DV later, and DVa 200, the contact point for the upper wing is 14.865 ft. I wonder if the crashes from wing roll-overs is mostly confined to the above Alb DIII's and DVa? Perhaps increasing the distance of the upper wing contact points on those aircraft might help solve the problem?

 

I dunno. The same sort of thing has happened to me in just about every plane.

 

NOTE: Just to be sure we're all on the same page here, I don't recall ever dying UNEXPECTEDLY from merely a "rough landing" in an intact plane. I land perfectly almost all the time, even when I'm drunk, because WW1 planes all land themselves. Just make sure you're pointing into the wind and let the plane glide on down. Nothing to it. Very occasionally, however, I'm too drunk sit up straight and as I wobble in my chair, I wobble my joystick. This usually results in a cartwheeling crash and I'm not surprised at all when this kills me. It's an extremely rare occasion that I do something in between, the "rough landing" where I lightly drag a wingtip or some such faux pas. This is usually caused by some real world distraction at the critical moment, or my joystick acting up. But while I might leave part of a wing on the runway, the "crash" was at such low speed that it shouldn't have killed me, and as far as I can remember, it never has.

 

Nor can I say I've ever really be surprised to die when landing with battle damage. In the vast majority of cases, my ability to control of the plane in flight before landing depends entirely on keeping it at fairly high speed, so I have enough aileron and rudder authority to counteract the unequal lift from damaged or missing wing parts. As such, I almost always touch down very gently in the vertical direction but at a much higher horizontal speed than with an undamaged landing. And the problem is, in most planes (although this varies), control authority goes away before the effects of unequal lift, so a rollover of some extent (perhaps limited only to severe yawing towards the damaged side) is inevitable. If the plane rolls over, there's nothing to stop it (as shown in my pics above). In such cases, I'm not surprised because I attribute my death to the excess forward speed I had to maintain to even get that far. IOW, even though the fatal roll is very slow, I'm still tearing along the ground at about 50 knots. I defy anybody to take that on the forehead and survive.

 

I therefore suggest that if you're thinking you're dying from "minor" "rough landings", next time take a close look at your ASI. I'll bet a 6-pack that you're going faster than you think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[DukeIronHand 8]

 

I therefore suggest that if you're thinking you're dying from "minor" "rough landings", next time take a close look at your ASI. I'll bet a 6-pack that you're going faster than you think.

 

 

Fosters Lager please.

 

I am not saying it happen a lot but enough times (3 to be exact usually with damage) to make me wonder if I should just try to "End Mission" while near the base or just to land.

 

And my landing speed is not an issue I assure you.

 

But OFF, like real life, can be funny. I once was dogfighting in a Br/F2b at low level with about 2 feet of my left lower wing missing. I was being chased by an Alb and honked in a tight turn to try and face him. Because of the damage (the plane was already flying funny) I lost control at probably 200' rolled and slammed into the ground going easy over 100 MPH.

I was very surprised that OFF did not kill me so I lived to fight another day.

[Bullethead 12]

I am not saying it happen a lot but enough times (3 to be exact usually with damage) to make me wonder if I should just try to "End Mission" while near the base or just to land.

 

And my landing speed is not an issue I assure you.

 

So how exactly did you come acropper? What was the sequenceof events? Just saying you died unexpectedly without giving the circumstances says nothing. I mean, this is a wager, and of alcohol. Serious issues like these require equally serious attention to detail .

 

And speaking of details, you wagered Foster's. While I admit that lager from Oz is better than from most other places, lager is still small change to any ale. The only lager worthy of wagering on is EKU 28 Kulminator Urtyp Hell, the only beer I've ever met that needs a beer chaser. So I'll put that up on my side

 

But OFF, like real life, can be funny. I once was dogfighting in a Br/F2b at low level with about 2 feet of my left lower wing missing. I was being chased by an Alb and honked in a tight turn to try and face him. Because of the damage (the plane was already flying funny) I lost control at probably 200' rolled and slammed into the ground going easy over 100 MPH.

I was very surprised that OFF did not kill me so I lived to fight another day.

 

I'm with Uncle Al on this sort of thing. Call in the "Adjustment Bureau" and delete the pilot. For instance, there's a caveat I should have attached to my above statement about never living or dying unexpectedly. In the DH5, it seems impossible to die in any sort of crash. But after testing this early on in a vertical dive from 15,000 feet, I'm no longer surprised by it, so this doesn't count

[DukeIronHand 8]

 

I mean, this is a wager, and of alcohol. Serious issues like these require equally serious attention to detail .

 

 

You are correct Sir!

 

A wager of this type is most serious indeed.

 

Unfortunately the details you demand, as is only fair, are somewhat sketchy in my memory.

 

I will remember the wager though and pay closer attention in the future. In my defense, when it did occur, I was stunned stupid by it all anyway.

 

Too bad OFF does not have a replay camera feature.

 

 

EDIT: The above crash is one of the three. While not enough to satisfy the demands of the above wager a cup of tea had jogged the memory. I am certain they all involve the Alb series and a wing touching/brushing the landing field as I apply rudder, while just above the ground, to straighten out my landing due to damage. Can you stall an aircraft just using a rudder? I'm guessing you can if the circumstances are just right but I am not sure.

Edited October 4, 2011 by DukeIronHand

[Bullethead 12]

EDIT: The above crash is one of the three. While not enough to satisfy the demands of the above wager a cup of tea had jogged the memory. I am certain they all involve the Alb series and a wing touching/brushing the landing field as I apply rudder, while just above the ground, to straighten out my landing due to damage. Can you stall an aircraft just using a rudder? I'm guessing you can if the circumstances are just right but I am not sure.

 

Yup, you can stall from using rudder. A moderate amount of rudder creates yaw, which increases drag. If you're already close to stall speed, this can put you over the edge. Less common but more dangerous is the sudden application of a lot of rudder, causing a rapid yaw. This causes unequal lift and will roll you over due to the outboard wing speeding up and the inboard wing slowing down during the yaw. If you're already close to stall speed, the inboard wing can actually stall, resulting in a snaproll instead of a barrel roll. Neither is a good thing to do on final approach, especially because by then you don't have much aileron authority to stop the roll. But if you're out of speed and have some altitude, the stomp-induced snaproll can be a useful evasive tactic.

[+Polovski 460]

There are 209398484 amounts (+/-) of data to check and several human errors in contact points is unavoidable.

 

Also all that going through 3+ versions of OFF and the fact that each one has to be measured and entered manually including x,y,z and +/- to indicate direction and with slightly varing models variants. Just the contacts alone (and the 2000 tests per craft) where enough to drive me insane let alone the FM testing.

 

Also through 20 or 30 or can't remember versions of AirWrench (a fantastic program by Jerry, but like all good programs still has some bugs over the years). At some point Airwrench unfortunately actually altered many numbers of contacts due to a bug which copied the PREVIOUS aircraft contacts cfg settings to the next one. Boy that was a joyous moment discovering that and then redoing them ALL

 

It will make NO difference to any issue above if you adjust the upper wing contact by .3 of a meter believe me. When we come to check things like contacts again send me anything you find HPW please, much appreciated.

[Wayfarer 5]

Yup, you can stall from using rudder. A moderate amount of rudder creates yaw, which increases drag. If you're already close to stall speed, this can put you over the edge. Less common but more dangerous is the sudden application of a lot of rudder, causing a rapid yaw. This causes unequal lift and will roll you over due to the outboard wing speeding up and the inboard wing slowing down during the yaw. If you're already close to stall speed, the inboard wing can actually stall, resulting in a snaproll instead of a barrel roll. Neither is a good thing to do on final approach, especially because by then you don't have much aileron authority to stop the roll. But if you're out of speed and have some altitude, the stomp-induced snaproll can be a useful evasive tactic.

 

 

That's interesting Bullethead, I think it may explain some of my more entertaining landings!

[RAF_Louvert 101]

.

 

Everyone who flys a sim, (and I do mean everyone), would benefit themselves immensely by reading Wolfgang Langewiesche's "Stick and Rudder: An Explanation of the Art of Flying". It is the best, most concise, and most easily understood text on the subject you will ever find. $10 to $15 will get you copies of it all day long.

 

.

[Bullethead 12]

Also through 20 or 30 or can't remember versions of AirWrench (a fantastic program by Jerry, but like all good programs still has some bugs over the years). At some point Airwrench unfortunately actually altered many numbers of contacts due to a bug which copied the PREVIOUS aircraft contacts cfg settings to the next one. Boy that was a joyous moment discovering that and then redoing them ALL

 

As a fellow game developer, I can sympathize. Eek! Having such a thing happen is my worst nightmare

[Bullethead 12]

That's interesting Bullethead, I think it may explain some of my more entertaining landings!

 

With a damaged plane, I find it best to divide my thinking about landing into 3 distinct phases: approach, touchdown, and rollout. Each presents different problems and what works in 1 phase will often kill you in another, so you have to change tactics a couple times during the whole process.

 

The goal in the approach phase is to regain and/or maintain control of the plane, by whatever means necessary, so that you have some hope of putting it down in the attitude you want. It all depends on what the airplane's willing to do at this point, and you might have to compromise on landing location to get the proper attitude. If you can't land in the proper attitude, you're going to crash, it's that simple, so make sure of that before you worry about trees and trenches on the landing ground. Those are problems for Phase 3.

 

Be aware that during the approach, your ability to control the plane is often dependent on speed. It often happens that a plane that can be held level at 80 knots will roll uncontrollably at 50 knots. So if you have the altitude available, it's a good idea to test the plane's low-speed handling before committing to a landing. Try a practice landing on top of a cloud or at least on some fixed point on your altimeter. Be sure to come off the rudder entirely just before you "land", to see what happens then (see below). This could show you that you're pretty well screwed but at least you'll know what to expect and can do your best to counter it when it counts. Also, what the plane does in this test can influence your choice of landing location, assuming you have sufficient control to pick your spot. A number of times, I've deliberately landed on slopes so the ground would be more parallel to what the attitude the plane wanted to assume at low speed. Also, planes often turn towards the damaged side during rollout, so if possible set up your approach so you'll have plenty of room on that side.

 

The actual touchdown is just that--the instant of touching down. There are 2 key points to this. First off, of course, your vertical speed has to be pretty low or you'll crash. Second is, you have to be moving straight ahead. If you have yaw when you hit the ground, there's a good chance your wheels (if you still have them) will dig in and trip you, or break off, which usually isn't much fun, either. Thus, if you've been standing on the rudder to maintain control during the approach, you have to come off it just before you hit the ground (which is why you want to see what happens when you do so during your practice landing above). You don't always have to come all the way off, just ease off as you get close to the ground, so the plane slowly straightens out just as you touch.

 

Also note that by this point in the game, you're just focused on setting down at the proper attitude (straight ahead, as level as possible) with the proper sink rate. The time for worrying about where you're landing and which direction you're pointing is over. You had your chance at those things during your approach. And this is true for ALL landings, whether you're damaged or not.

 

OK, now you're on the ground rolling along probably a bit faster than your stall speed, due to the need for excess speed to retain control during the approach. This is the most dangerous phase because you're fast enough that aerodynamic forces can still roll or yaw you over, but you're often too slow to have enough control authority to prevent this entirely. This is why it's sometimes a good idea to land across sloping ground.

 

Just remember, don't be surprised if you die in this phase. No matter how far you had to limp home to get here, the mere fact that you did it shows that part of the process wasn't very hard. If you crash before touchdown, it shows that the task was impossible to begin with. For this reason, I tend to set down immediately on the 1st friendly ground I come to, even if I could fly all the way home. I'd rather get it over with than waste time flying 20 miles only to die anyway

 

Anyway, during your approach, aerodynamic forces were your friends because they kept you in the air and gave you control. During the rollout, though, they're enemies. Thus, the key objective during the rollout is to slow down enough to eliminate them. The problem is, due to the excess speed you had to maintain to keep control, your tailskid is still well off the ground at this point, and you have enough speed that if you pull back much on the stick, you'll leave the ground and stall instead of putting the tail on the ground. And while you're struggling with this, your aileron authority especially is going away and any unequal lift from damage is trying to roll you over. Thus, rollout in a damaged plane is often a real rodeo ride.

 

Successful outcomes depend largely on what plane you're in (some have better survival instincts than others) and the extent of the damage. There are, however, a few things you can do to help. They don't always work--sometimes you're just screwed--but I've had fair success with them. What I find works best is a combination of small to moderate amounts of rudder TOWARD my damaged side combined with slowly increasing backpressure on the stick.

 

When you're on the ground, rudder tends to create a rolling force away from the turn, just like how cars and boats lean to the outisde of turns. This is often the only way to keep the plane rightside up, but it does make your landing run into an arc, so plan for this in advance and land with plenty of room on that side. Just don't overdo it and stick the outboard wingtip in the ground, or snap your wheels off. Anyway, the turn causes some skidding which helps slow you down as well as keep you level.

 

Meanwhile, the backpressure on the stick increases your angle of attack, which increases drag, which slows you down. You have to do this very slowly and gently, though, to prevent going back up in the air while you've still got enough speed for that. Eventually, you'll get the tailskid on the ground.

 

Congratulations! Once your tail's down, you've pretty much got it made. You're now slow enough that aerodynamic forces from damaged parts are no longer a factor and you can finish your rollout as with a normal landing. Of course, you might now be heading straight for a tree, but you should have thought of that during your approach

 

Everyone who flys a sim, (and I do mean everyone), would benefit themselves immensely by reading Wolfgang Langewiesche's "Stick and Rudder: An Explanation of the Art of Flying". It is the best, most concise, and most easily understood text on the subject you will ever find. $10 to $15 will get you copies of it all day long.

 

Hmmm, this is an old book. It should now be public domain. Strange that I can't find a free PDF of it, but I haven't yet looked all that hard.